The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed disabilities, including loss of teeth and malocclusion, were not incurred or aggravated by service. The preponderance of evidence is against a current diagnosis of post-operative residuals from the in-service bilateral mandibular osteotomy.
The deciding factor: The VA dental examination found no current residuals from the osteotomy and provided detailed explanations regarding the effects of the various aspects of the surgical process, including the surgery itself and the length of time that his arch bars were in place. The veteran's lay opinion lacks probative value as he is not shown to possess the requisite medical training or credentials needed to render a diagnosis.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of a bilateral mandibular osteotomy, loss of teeth, malocclusion
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 19, 2005
- Citation
- 0525624
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0525624.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeal for compensation under 38 USC § 1151 for loss of teeth, and the appeal is dismissed.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including prostate cancer, CAD, and bilateral lower extremity nerve damage, have rendered him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation. The Board has granted the TDIU.
- Denied
The Veteran's initial claim for an increased rating for loss of teeth was denied as her disability did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 9913.,The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for telogen effluvium (claimed as hair loss) was also denied, as there is no evidence that she has lost all body hair.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's attempts to appeal the denial of service connection for loss of teeth were not timely filed, and thus their appeals are dismissed.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.